The University of New Hampshire Law Review
Abstract
Courts are divided on the question of how Sixth Amendment public trial violations should be evaluated on appeal when a criminal defendant fails to object at trial to a courtroom closure. Typically, failing to object triggers plain error review on appeal, which demands a higher threshold of harm to obtain reversal compared to when an objection has been made at trial. Should this type of review also apply in its usual form to public trial errors? The article concludes that it should, despite the fact that public trial violations are considered “structural,” and, when properly preserved, do not require a showing of harm arising from the violation.
Repository Citation
23 U.N.H. L. Rev. 65 (2025).
COinS